By: Vančo K. Tegov
Is there a danger that the country’s internal order and social peace could break down? Yes, there is. The greatest danger comes from those who have long been undermining, exploiting, and abusing that very system. All in the name of something they could not explain even to themselves, let alone to those in whose “name” they claimed to act and whom they purported to represent.
The situation has so far bordered on uncontrolled chaos
April was a critical month. Even then, it was possible to foresee that the previously unquestioning financiers of the never-full-enough coffers of various “civil society” groups and organisations, or rather quasi-state entities, would rush to allocate and distribute larger sums deemed essential for their “survival,” despite the fact that the troughs and funding channels were already quite full and had produced little of tangible value.
Apart from performances involving the somewhat indecent and tasteless antics of aging female activists grating carrots against their crotches, and young men with white-powdered noses. Once people become accustomed to such performances by the aforementioned “graters” and white-nosed activists, ideas, or rather demands, multiply relentlessly. Along with them come increasing pressures on those responsible for distributing public funds and filling these troughs and feeding stations.
To conceal their own involvement as beneficiaries of these funding streams, the inflows of money kept growing to the point where some ministries dug such large financial holes for themselves that they could have drawn in even the entirely innocent officials who would later replace them.
Upon taking office, these newcomers had to focus almost immediately on stopping the outflow of money from these troughs, effectively standing guard in person to prevent excessively spoiled beneficiaries from carrying away more funds and continuing what the author describes as a grab for resources by those engaged in unproductive activities.
Before winter, foxes are hungry and have no stockpile. Short-sighted, is it not?
Put differently, this means that some groups that presented themselves as part of civil society were largely opaque, quasi-state organisations with a political bias toward the left. Rather than representing the broader interests of society, they often functioned as an extension of particular political interests.
Short-sighted? Certainly.
Civil society should act as a corrective to those in power, not as their calculating supporter. When that role is reversed, public trust is lost. And when political protection disappears, the supply can quickly disappear as well.
Before winter, however, foxes are hungry. And a hungry fox finds it difficult to conceal whose interests it was really serving.
The purpose of the state is the well-being of everyone, not primarily of those who excel at “beating empty straw”.
The purpose of the state is the well-being of all, not predominantly the well-being of those who are most skilled at the exercise of “beating empty straw” (that is, engaging in unproductive talk or activity).
The state is not a stage for the loudest voices. It is not the spoils of political networks. And it is not a service for those who have learned how to create the impression, through many words, pressure campaigns, and media attention, that they speak on behalf of everyone. The state is a community of all its people.
Therefore, the benchmark should be quite simple: does the system work for the person who gets up in the morning, goes to work, pays taxes, takes care of their family, and expects the state to do its part? Or does the system work better for those who know how to demand, pressure, protest, and turn their “civic engagement” into political capital most effectively?
If it is the latter, then the problem is not merely hungry foxes. The problem is that for too long we have allowed them to build up their own stockpiles. And that is why a response is bound to follow.
Order is the foundation of society – it is right that this be restored and preserved in Slovenia
Things used to be simpler. Not because the world was better, but because there was a certain sense of order. People knew what justice was, what responsibility meant, and above all, that every right also had another side: an obligation. Today, it seems we have somewhat forgotten this.
More often, we hear about rights, demands, privileges, and expectations placed upon the state. Much less is said about individual responsibility, work, duties, and the willingness to contribute oneself. It is as if the state has become an endless service provider that must take care of everything, regardless of how much the individual contributes in return.
Yet order is what keeps society functioning.
This is not a call for a harsher state. It is a call for normality. A call to restore balance between rights and responsibilities, between assistance and accountability, between individual freedom and responsibility toward the community. And it is right that this balance be restored and preserved in Slovenia as well.
A state that only distributes benefits but does not demand responsibility does not help people in the long run. It creates dependency. And a state that primarily rewards those who are loudest, apply the most pressure, or enjoy political favouritism will sooner or later lose sight of those who quietly work, create value, and pay their share. Perhaps this is why it is time to ask a very simple question once again:
What does the state expect from me, and what can I expect from the state? The answer should be fair to both sides.
Responsible citizens and the inability to create new opportunities
Perhaps the greatest problem in our society is that we have grown accustomed to waiting. We wait for the state, for politicians, for institutions, for funding calls, for permits, for someone else to take the first step. In doing so, we forget something fundamental: the state is also its citizens.
A responsible citizen is not someone who merely demands their rights. A responsible citizen is also someone who understands their duties, respects the rules, works, creates value, and is willing to assume a share of responsibility for the community.
But here an interesting paradox emerges. We have people willing to work, we have knowledge, ideas, and talent, yet too often we fail to create the space in which something new can grow from them. This is due in part to overly aggressive beneficiaries of public funding.
Instead of creating new paths for development, we create new obstacles. Instead of opening doors, we put up barriers. Instead of saying “give it a try” to someone who wants to build or create something, we too often first present them with a form, a regulation, a permit, and a list of requirements.
And then we wonder why there is not enough entrepreneurship, why young people leave, why good ideas are lost, and why people who could create something valuable spend their energy fighting their way through bureaucratic mazes.
A society does not progress by constantly closing paths. It progresses by creating new ones.
That is why we need more responsible citizens, but also a state that does not make responsibility more difficult. A person who wants to work, create, and contribute should have the state at their side, not standing in their way.
Because if we want a future, we must know how to create paths leading to it.
Not merely talk about new paths. We must open them. That is the right way to do it.